Comments
ONE MAN'S OPINION - The current wars encompassing the Middle East and Ukraine, as well as the escalating situation in the Pacific, should be among the foremost thoughts in the minds of our presidential candidates. They are not, due to festering domestic divisions regarding immigration, the economy, abortion and taxation. As important as these issues are for the United States, the current international conflicts will have more severe consequences the world over. The stakes are much higher and more dangerous.
The so-called Axis of Evil - Russia, China, Iran and North Korea – are not likely to launch operations beyond those already in progress. As individual nations, they have little chance of success against the US and its key allies.
Russia has its hands full with Ukraine and has resorted to drawing reinforcements from North Korea. Putin is wary of attempting a general mobilization for fear of widespread dissonance among the urban populations.
China must be mindful of its own capabilities when it comes to invading Taiwan. Any plans to support Russia would evaporate as a war in the Pacific would drain Beijing’s military and GDP. According to many military experts, an attacking force requires triple the firepower of the defenders. No nation really wants to resort to tactical nuclear weapons, either. The retired senior officers appearing on all of the network and cable outlets agree.
Russia and China will not give North Korea the green light to invade South Korea. Kim Jung Un is too much of a loose cannon to unleash. Their fear would be that Pajama Boy (or his equally deranged sister) would cross the nuclear or biological warfare line. Putin and Xi do not want a scenario that could spin out of their control. They also know it would mean the end of Kim’s hermit kingdom.
Iran simply does not have the capacity to overwhelm Israel’s defenses and itself is highly vulnerable to a devastating attack, especially one where the US coordinates with the IDF.
Any further act of aggression by any or all of the Axis would sow chaos and carnage. However, there would be far more damage to the attackers’ economies and military establishments, not to mention domestic unrest among their people.
All four members of the Axis working in concert, that is with a coordinated plan of attack, would be the gravest of all scenarios. For this to happen, they would have to be on the same page economically and have the same military priorities.
There is a degree of mistrust between the two senior partners – Russia and China – not to mention the different geographic priorities each has if a wider war were to break out. China would need to completely focus on Taiwan and the South China Sea to stand a chance of achieving the conquest of Taiwan. Likewise, a two-front conflict would stretch Russia’s logistics to the breaking point.
The raw manpower and manufacturing of basic weapons by the junior partners of the Axis, Iran and North Korea, would be hard-pressed to support two fronts separated by thousands of miles.
Neither Harris nor Trump has taken a substantive stand on the role of the United States in Ukraine. Trump’s claim that he could end the war in Ukraine upon taking office is pure rubbish.
Harris claims she will continue supporting Ukraine, but there is no indication she would enhance our assistance or allow the Ukrainians to extend the range of the US supplied ATACMS to strike key military and production facilities deeper within Russia. By continuing Biden’s policy of limiting the range plays into Putin’s hands. There should be no conventional military asset in Russia safe from attack.
Russia and Ukraine have irreconcilable differences as far as a formulating a treaty to end the war. The key is control of Crimea. The only way that will be resolved is through armed conflict, but not necessarily a massive ground battle. Ukraine could prevail by cutting Crimea off from supply and eradicating Russia’s air defenses on the peninsula, making the occupation untenable. The Russian Navy has already had to skedaddle from its key naval base in Sevastopol.
The bloodshed in Lebanon and Gaza will only fade if Iran loses its ability to supply their proxies. This should be the priority of the IDF rather than urban fighting and pushed by the United States. Of course, the IDF would still need to find and free the hostages. This will necessitate targeted operations in Gaza based on intelligence.
China and the US have a symbiotic trade relationship – we buy, they finance. A war would be detrimental to both countries, but far more for China if their domestic production tanks due to lost trade. Our next president will need to play high stakes poker. On the surface, Trump might have the advantage, but he will tend to ignore his advisors and take risks. Harris will take a team approach and weigh her options. Therefore, it is important that her cabinet include those with strikingly different views, along the lines of Lincoln’s “Team of Rivals.”
Regardless of who occupies the White House in January, the resolve of Trump or Harris will be put to the test on day one.
I fear Trump’s mercurial and despotic nature; I hold my breath when it comes to Harris’ commitment to face down our adversaries.
But first we have to survive the election and its aftermath.
(Paul Hatfield is a board member and past president of the Valley Village Residents Association; former Treasurer and board member of Neighborhood Council Valley Village and an Active CPA and Accounting Consultant and contributor to CityWatchLA.com.)
